[governance] What is Network Neutrality - was; a very

[JFC Morfin]

Dear Parminder,
I am afraid the NNs you describe cannot exist because they are not 
technically stable. Neutrality means that the system is not to be 
part of any conflict, and equally support competitors. If someone 
pays more, neutrality is to give him more. To say that everyone must 
pay the same and get the same is business egalitarism. To make sure 
everyone get the same lowest grade service, in the hope this will 
help that minimum to grow, is collectivism. Taking care of people is 
to give each and everyone what they need for the price they can pay. 
This calls for efficiency first, i.e. for the traffic cost to be at 
the lowest for the highest quality.

The international network was built to be efficient. Neutrality 
(which actually implies: "keep accounting simple") is an efficiency 
tool. Egalitarism is not. But may you are right, the legacy Internet 
was built to be egalitarian. Some people being just more equal than 
others. Let be careful, enforcing whatever NN on top of it will 
constraining. Constraints in a dynamic system lead to mid-term instability.
jfc

At 13:52 06/01/2009, Parminder wrote:
>I agree that it is a crucial and a difficult time for global public 
>interest advocates interested in 'saving the Internet' in its 
>original open, public and egalitarian conception.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090106/ce102692/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance